 |
bostonbubble.com Boston Bubble - Boston Real Estate Analysis
|
SPONSORED LINKS
Advertise on Boston Bubble
Buyer brokers and motivated
sellers, reach potential buyers.
www.bostonbubble.com
YOUR AD HERE
|
|
DISCLAIMER: The information provided on this website and in the
associated forums comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, expressed
or implied. You assume all risk for your own use of the information
provided as the accuracy of the information is in no way guaranteed.
As always, cross check information that you would deem useful against
multiple, reliable, independent resources. The opinions expressed
belong to the individual authors and not necessarily to other parties.
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
admin Site Admin
Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 1826 Location: Greater Boston
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 2:52 pm GMT Post subject: Re: Circular |
|
|
JCK wrote: | admin wrote: | Your definition of a "steady market" has nominal appreciation built in. |
Doesn't looking at the market by adjusting for CPI make a similar assumption? Shouldn't the "steady market" roughly track inflation? |
I probably should have phrased that better. I'm not quibbling with the definition of a steady market - I think it's at least in the right ballpark. What I'm saying is that it is the assumption that we are already in a steady market which makes the end result predict appreciation. Conversely, if you assume that we aren't yet in a steady market, the model predicts depreciation. So the model hinges on whether the market is already steady or not and serves to reinforce that initial assumption.
- admin |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Former Home Owner Guest
|
Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 6:07 pm GMT Post subject: Steady Market and inflation |
|
|
Is the belief that Inflation will drive rents higher?
A good or service inflates when there is lots of competition or interest in it.
If food and gas continue to inflate is there enough money in the economy to drive Rents higher? In the 1970s many more employees were Union members and there were Union contracts that forced employers to give Cost of Living Increases in Salary. There are Many fewer Union employees today.
Any thoughts? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
balor123
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 1204
|
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:46 am GMT Post subject: |
|
|
Home prices deflating?
Cambridge Condo on Redfin
Sold in 2006 for $430k, now asking $469k 1.5 years later for just over 10% appreciation or 5% per year. Granted, this house will probably sell for less than that, maybe $450k, which gives an appreciation somewhere around 2%/yr. If there has been a correction, I don't see it in the properties that I'm looking (those like this one). Even inflation adjusted properties like these are at least holding their value and many are still appreciating. Income has remained the same and perhaps even lost to inflation since 2006 but cost of living (food, gas) has increased and the state continues to lose people.
Boston has long been unaffordable and it's not clear to me how the city maintains that status. Only in this city would a median home to income ratio of 4.2 be considered a bargain:
Homing in
Why do people in this state do this to themselves? That is, force themselves to live month-to-month and carry large amounts of expensive debt in generally poor quality housing.
I should probably disclose at this point that I am a Texas native and not just any Texan but one from San Antonio, among the most affordable markets in the country, and so I am somewhat biased against housing in Boston (when I first moved here, I thought the whole city was poor juding by the look of houses here!). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
balor123
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 1204
|
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 2:26 am GMT Post subject: |
|
|
I went through Redfin postings looking for properties 0 - $650k, 3+ beds, 2+ baths, last sold in the last 5 or so years and separated them by gainers and losers.
Gainers:
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
Losers:
link
link
link
link
link
link
link
As a whole, based on asking prices, homes in Boston suburbs don't seem to be hurting that much. The yearly appreciation on these houses is about 4% on average (2% adjusted for core inflation, 0% for real inflation). While these appreciations aren't huge, they don't exactly indicate a correction either. Incomes have risen at about the same rate so it looks like affordability hasn't changed much either for these houses.
You can find deals around the Boston area but it seems like the further away from Boston you get the bigger the drop in housing prices so while the greater Boston area might be experiencing a correction, the lesser Boston area is not.
Does anyone know what's going on in Wayland? It looks terrible there. One house sold two years ago for $700k and is now asking $500k. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Hard Rain Guest
|
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 10:55 am GMT Post subject: |
|
|
It's not only Wayland ,most of the suburbs are getting crushed. Lastest sale in Sherborn :
114 woodland st:
sold for 1,025,000.00 on 5/15/2008
Previous sale date 2/2004 for 1,525,000.00
Ouch! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Teavo Guest
|
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 2:28 pm GMT Post subject: Gainers not looking so good |
|
|
balor123 wrote: | I went through Redfin postings looking for properties 0 - $650k, 3+ beds, 2+ baths, last sold in the last 5 or so years and separated them by gainers and losers...
You can find deals around the Boston area but it seems like the further away from Boston you get the bigger the drop in housing prices so while the greater Boston area might be experiencing a correction, the lesser Boston area is not. |
I understand your point and generally agree with it, but keep in mind that you are comparing asking prices to sale prices. None of those houses is a "gainer" until it actually sells at a price higher than it was purchased for.
And not even then. I clicked on a few of your "gainer" links and see that you're comparing a 2008 (asking) price to several 2002 sale prices. That's a six year span.
If a house sold for $400K in 2002, and then sold for $420K in 2008, would you consider that a "gainer"? I wouldn't, for two major reasons:
1. Transaction costs - drop at least 6% from the sale price for realtor fees, etc.
2. Inflation - $400K in 2008 is worth less than $400K in 2002. Roughly 20% less. The effect is substantial.
For example (very roughly, the math here is a bit imprecise) if a house sold in 2002 for $400K, it would need to sell at (not just ask for) $400K * 1.2 [inflation] * 1.06 [realtor fee] = $509K just to break even.
So a $400K from 2002 that sells for $500K today is a loser.
And some of these houses may have had additional money invested in fixing them up or improving/expanding them since they were last bought. That effectively increases the previous purchase price. You'd have to factor in that money too before deciding which ones are "gainers". |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
balor123
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Posts: 1204
|
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 3:43 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
1. I'm not saying that these people are making money. Just that their housing values are holding up.
2. $400k in 2002 is definitely worth more in 2002 however $400k was more arffordable in 2002 than $500k is today. There's also no doubt that housing has made a poor investment relative to other options but it appears to be keeping up with inflation. A lot of the examples in there are more like $400k in 2006 $420k in 2007. I didn't include houses that looked like they'd had a lot of money put into them. Many of those houses are new construction so wouldn't need it anyway. Those are typical listings if you start selecting at random in those areas you will find the same results.
I consider places like Waltham and Newton to be suburbs. Places like Wayland and Sherborn are far from Boston. They're hurting in large part because of transportation inflation. Living in Wayland and commuting to Boston might cost $200/mo more than it did 2 years ago, which is $200 less that can be spent on mortgage.
It is also worth pointing out that mortgage rates have dropped a little this year since the low in Jan. They are now closer to 5.5% but the Fed has indicated that they won't be lowering rates anytime soon and will likely be increasing rates starting in 2009. They notes also indicate expectation for a worsening economy and increasing core inflation. MA is supposed to be hit with a bunch of missed payments starting this month. We would have seen foreclosures starting in August but MA recently passed a bill that would extend that deadline by another few months. Thus, while foreclosures were supposed to be tapering off in 2009 I think we'll see the rates remain high through early 2009 and not start to fall until mid 2009. These are all bad factors for housing.
On the bright side, very few housing permits have been issued over the past year so if the state grows at all (see previous post) then there is a little support for existing homes. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Teavo Guest
|
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 4:32 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
balor123 wrote: | 1. I'm not saying that these people are making money. Just that their housing values are holding up. |
My point is that many of your "gainer" links do not show that housing values are holding up (much less making money for their owners). Inflation alone shows that in many of the cases you linked to. And your comparison between asking prices of today and actual prices from the past is not sound, especially in today's slow market where sellers frequently sell below asking price.
balor123 wrote: | 2. $400k in 2002 is definitely worth more in 2002 however $400k was more arffordable in 2002 than $500k is today. |
Not by much. Take a look at historical mortgage rates and you'll see that the difference is minor (scroll about halfway down the page).
Anyway, feel free to factor it in. Its modest effect does not change my original point which is that at least some of the "gainers" you linked to are not, in fact, gainers at all. They are "losers".
balor123 wrote: | There's also no doubt that housing has made a poor investment relative to other options but it appears to be keeping up with inflation. |
Your assertion that housing "appears to be keeping up with inflation" appears to be incorrect as well, unless you're going especially far back for a starting point. See this excellent post about real MA home prices from 'admin' right here on this website. It has a chart at the top that shows inflation adjusted median single-family-home prices over the past several years. The latest data (March 2008) has dropped below 2003 levels and is very close to 2002, while continuing to show a further downward trend. If it continues, we'll drop below 2002 and be on our way to 2001 soon.
I just want to say that I think most of what you've posted is reasonable and I agree with a lot of it. I am just pointing out a few items that I think are mistakes. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest Guest
|
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:13 am GMT Post subject: Re: newton too |
|
|
Check this BS out-- 75 days listed-- no offers-- so what do they do-- raise the price by 4k...
11 Rider Ter
Newton, MA 02466
Beds: 4 On Redfin: 75 days
Baths: 2.5 Year Built: 1950
SQ.FT.: 2,167 Lot Size: 7,102 sf
$/SQ.FT.: $369 MLS# 70737102
Status: Price Change
Last Sale: $410,000 (08/22/2007)
Listing: Allied Realty Advisors
guest wrote: | check out this one-- absolutley ridiculous.
11 rider terrace
newton, MA 02466
originally sold 08/22/2007: $410,000
Status Active
Price $795,000
Sold Price $0
Date Sold
Type Single Family
Style Cape
Rooms 7
Bedrooms 4
Baths 2 Full, 1 Half
Age (years) 58
MLS# 70737102
So for 385k i am assuming that you get a fulltime butler for the first 3 years because there in no way in hell you can improve a house that much...
nothing in that area is even comparable to that price per sqft. They list it as a million dollar neighborhood but there is not a single house that has sold for that in that area. I hope they go bankrupt |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
guest Guest
|
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2008 12:37 am GMT Post subject: |
|
|
went through those links-- 3 are no longer listed-- either pulled or sold but no sales data.. lots have reduced there prices--- My guess it that it is a lot worse than sellers want to admit.
Everyone i talk to is getting murdered by gas and food... and don't even want to talk about home prices.
regardless of the market, there will always be some people willing to buy-- but not enough to support the current market downturn-- people that are forced to sell will be hurt. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Forum posts are owned by the original posters.
Forum boards are Copyright 2005 - present, bostonbubble.com.
Privacy policy in effect.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|